Are women flaunting their wares in public more each year?

[Nabartek]

If there were cops, hed be arrested. If it were a naked women, i doubt she will be arrested. She'd probably have fans and be catcalled

[Meyerland]

Originally Posted by Nabartek

You cant distinguish a trunk or speedo from a regular underwear boxer? Guess what..women wear bras and bikinis to the beach (disguised as "swimwear"). But funny thing, you mentioned beach, i mentioned about seeing a girl walking in panties in downtown... and not getting arrested. Men who would dare walk around boxer/briefs will be jailed for indecency

Laws have been made against those "pants on the knees", but there are no laws against womens butt cracks showing from their pants or with their **** almost falling off their shirts...(in casual situation. Job etiquettes not included)

Women just complain too much eitherway Complain that society does not find them attractive, complains if society looks at theie beauty.

Hah! I can tell the difference between boxers and swim trunks. The button closure in the front gives many away, also the flannel /plaidish designs. I live in a hot area and see people from all types of backgrounds etc...
I went to school with many hippie/grunge types in the nineties so I saw pretty much every thing you could imagine. Austin even allows topless women in the local parks/swimming holes.

I've never seen a man or woman be arrested for indecency, even if they are flashing some skin. Urinating in public is a big problem and I have seen someone get cited for that.

I personally feel life is too short to worry about what other people wear. I've seen a trans prostitute in Montrose wearing see through clothing walking down the public street at night showing pretty much everything. I just turned my head and kept driving. I dress fairly conservatively because I want to. They can wear whatever they want to. No big deal.

I think straight men naturally look away from other guys and don't look at their lower regions. Women notice other women and men. We don't have a stigma associated with looking at either sex.

There are many guys who go for the full on john Hamm look in flat front pants, and lots of guys show their jewels off while lifting weights at the gym. Those loose shorts show off quite a bit. I wonder if they are gay or clueless. Maybe they want to flash others. Whatever.

I just look away.

There will be more females dressed in a way to show off some skin, especially if they live in a hot climate. Some men do it too. Especially those who are working out or playing a sport.

[Mikala43]

I dunno. i'm naked does that count.?

[newdixiegirl]

Originally Posted by Nabartek

At least men are honest - they know what their wearing is slobby. Meanwhile, for women, they think its proper and insist or else you are "**** shaming".

I saw a young lady walking with a tshirt and panty in Santa Barbara. Ive never seen a man walking with a shirt and boxers downtown. They will be arrested. Women should be held at the same standards as men. If they are walking downtown in their underwear, they should be arrested for indecency.

Are you sure? I often see men working out/playing sports outdoors or simply walking on the sidewalk, wearing only athletic shorts (shirtless). I've never heard or notice anyone object to that. Heck, I'm jealous. Wish we could do that.

Having said that, I'm not defending a woman who walks around any public area wearing panties and a t-shirt.

[Those Who Squirm]

Originally Posted by goodheathen

Populating shifting toward warmer climates (along with global warming) - I've long believed that too. On top of that, women seem to be more temperature-sensitive than men. However, unless it's over 90 or so, clothes do not have to be skimpy to be comfortable. Clearly, in warm weather, many women aren't in very revealing clothing. "Comfort" as usual when it comes to style seems to be used as an excuse. Somebody in the media ought to come out with an article or report on how to dress inexpensively and comfortably for summer in clothes that don't look trashy.

I've had workout workout shorts that were typically down-to-the knee modest, but the material was so light (without being sheer) that they were indeed extremely comfortable, in the sense that they felt like nothing at all. I really found this out one day after the workout when I was in the locker room about to head to the showers--long story but there's a point. Realizing I needed to return to the exercise floor to retrieve some headphones, I just slipped the workout shorts back on without bothering about underwear. AS I headed out into the public area, I actually had to look down at myself to make sure I wasn't parading onto the exercise area naked except for a shirt! Without the underwear underneath, those workout shorts felt exactly like that. So yes, it's definitely possible for more modest clothing to be comfortable. However, even allowing for that, shorter/more skimpy clothing of the same material would be even more comfortable. At least it would be good to have the option.

[fundamentallyspeaking]

Well, with the rise in the earth's temperatures, we are bound to see less. But I did note a trend in see through clothing. This seems to have started with the stars at the Oscars and has trickled down to the masses in a lesser way.

[Vodoven]

Originally Posted by Meyerland

I think there are a variety of reasons for the people who complain about lack of modesty and declining morals...

Being very modest in oneself
Being very religious
Forgetting what it was like back in earlier times
Not being alive when risqué fashions were de rigueur
Equating the human body with lust or sin
Getting older and getting crochety

Between 1795-1820 English and French fashion for the upper classes dictated showing the human form beneath clothing. Men's fashions were very fitted and tight. Women's fashions were sheer and you could see the breasts beneath. Women often chose to dampen the muslin fabric to make it cling and some rouged the areolas.

That's just one example, as there are countless ones throughout history.

Each generation is not getting more hedonistic, immodest, or spoiled. Some people are more modest than others, and it has been that way for all of human history.

I think women have been inclined to exhibit their forms since the earliest days. My post is about a particular part of the body emphasized in a particular way, that seems relatively new.

This woman took a stand against bottom-hugging leggings, for supposedly religious reasons, though she and her husband were accused of immorally cutting down some juniper trees to improve a mountain view. Nobody seems to be a saint.

[bulmabriefs144]

Originally Posted by bande1102

Men sexually harassing women has nothing to do with the women's attractiveness.

Exactly. Sorry, someone here said "if you're flaunting stuff in public, you're asking to be hit on". This is wrong. I went to the pridefest in Richmond yesterday. Along with obvious drag queens, and not as obvious passable crossdressers, transgender people, and the rest of the LGBT group, therewere a number of people making odd fashion statements. One of them was at least one women, with just a bra and shorts. I thought about this after the fact. She wasn't very attractive and wasn't dressed provocatively, she just wasn't wearing a shirt. I've always worn a tee shirt in public, but it's not shocking. And yet somehow we've decided that a no shirt look for women is sexual. Her sexual organs were clearly covered and she was making no fuss about it, so I didn't either.

The only time you should hit on a girl is if you like something about her, or have gotten to know her. Being underdressed doesn't give you permission. Now you could decide that you like her willingness to not let modesty rules affect her, but there is no such thing as asking for it.

[Where2now22]

There is no need for men to look at naked women on the internet when they can go to the local store.